Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has given his blessing to a new big-money super PAC and authored a fund-raising missive on the group’s behalf, OpenSecrets Blog has learned.

“There can be no greater priority than protecting the Democratic majority in the Senate,” Reid wrote in a fund-raising email (see below) sent to his supporters Tuesday. “I’m writing to introduce you to a group solely devoted to leveling the playing field and protecting the Democratic majority in the Senate: Majority PAC.”

“In 2010, the GOP’s big money advantage helped them take the House — and nearly cost us the Senate, as well.” Reid continued, before encouraging his supporters to donate to Majority PAC. “We can’t let that happen again this time.”Reid Majority PAC Solicitation

(Update 6/22, 4 p.m.: Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), an OpenSecrets Blog reader reports, has also issued a similar fund-raising plea on behalf of Majority PAC. View this email here.)

Majority PAC is a so-called super PAC, which is legally allowed to raise unlimited contributions from individuals, corporations and unions thanks to legal decisions last year including the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling and the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission case.

Money spent by super PACs such as Majority PAC cannot be donated to candidates’ own campaign coffers. Instead, the cash they raise is typically used to produce political advertisements that expressly advocate for or against politicians. And as a super PAC, the group is not allowed to coordinate with candidates’ campaigns when making these expenditures.

Despite the rules against coordination, super PACs may have close ties with the politicians they are independently working to elect.

Reid’s direct appeal for his supporters to open their wallets for Majority PAC also comes at a time of increased haziness about how explicitly lawmakers can raise money for big-money outside groups without running afoul of federal election laws.

Earlier this year, Republican super lawyer and campaign finance reform foe Jim Bopp formed a super PAC — called Republican Super PAC — with the hopes of having federal politicians solicit donations for the group, as OpenSecrets Blog previously reported.

Majority PAC and its allied organization, House Majority PAC, followed suit by asking the FEC for permission for candidates to solicit donations for super PACs. It’s a request that the FEC has not yet either granted or denied.

QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LETTER OF THE LAW

The actions have earned the ire of advocacy groups that favor campaign finance regulation, including Democracy 21 and the Campaign Legal Center.

In the wake of Bopp’s move, the two groups sent a letter to all members of Congress admonishing them, because in their view “any federal officeholder or candidate who solicits unlimited contributions for an independent-spending super PAC is violating the federal law that prohibits federal officeholders and candidates from soliciting unlimited contributions in connection with a federal election.”

They also sent official comments to the FEC urging the commission to “make clear” that officials — including candidates, members of Congress and national political party leaders — may not solicit unlimited individual contributions, nor any corporate and union contributions.

While the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, also known as McCain-Feingold after its chief sponsors in the Senate, prohibits members of Congress and federal candidates from soliciting unlimited “soft money” donations, they are not prohibited from soliciting limited “hard money” contributions.

In other words, members of Congress, in these groups’ view, cannot solicit unlimited contributions for super PACs. But members of Congress may be allowed to solicit limited contributions for super PACs.

Indeed, Reid’s fund-raising email on behalf of Majority PAC includes a caveat at the bottom of the message. It states that Reid is “only asking for a donation of up to $5,000 from individuals and federal PACs. He is not asking for funds from corporations, labor unions or other federally prohibited sources.”

“Reid here is clearly asking only for contributions from individuals within the federal contribution limits,” Malloy continued. “Barring sudden action from the FEC, it seems likely that other officeholders will follow suit — at least insofar as they are only raising ‘hard money’ for super PACs — if they haven’t already begun such solicitations.”

For his part, Bopp has maintained that his new group isn’t violating campaign finance law and that getting the FEC’s prior approval is an unnecessary step.

The Democratic groups, Bopp told OpenSecrets Blog, are “asking for permission to have party officials raise money for super PACs.”

“They just want the FEC to say it’s okay,” he continued. “I can read the Federal Elections Campaign Act, and it clearly allows that.”

Reid’s Senate office referred calls from OpenSecrets Blog to his campaign, which did not return inquiries seeking comment. A spokesman for Majority PAC could not immediately be reached for comment.

Overall, for every dollar spent by liberal super PACs, conservative super PACs spent about $1.26, according to the Center’s research. During the 2010 midterm elections, liberal groups made $28.4 million worth of independent expenditures and conservative super PACs made $35.4 million worth.

Following historic Republican congressional seat gains during November election, many prominent Democratic operatives pledged to create more big-money outside groups. These include super PACs and certain nonprofit groups, which were also active players during the 2010 election cycle and more overwhelmingly aided Republican candidates.

The post-election rush by Democrats to establish new super PACs also comes amid a debate about new disclosure rules for groups that air political advertisements, and more broadly, the role of corporate money in elections.

Russ Feingold, the Wisconsin Democrat who as a U.S. senator helped craft the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 and was ousted from his Senate seat in November, has repeatedly criticized Democratic politicians and operatives who want to unleash new super PACs and nonprofit groups.

During the progressive Netroots Nation conference in Minneapolis last weekend, Feingold told a crowd that Democrats who endorse these new efforts are “dancing with the devil.”

“We can raise that money with people power,” he said. “[We can] raise it without selling our soul.”

But at the same conference, Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz argued that Democrats needn’t shy away from the new groups.

For his part, Reid attempted to shepherd new disclosure rules for political ads through the Senate last year, but he couldn’t overcome Republican opposition. Twice, the DISCLOSE Act garnered a majority of votes on the Senate floor, but not the 60 votes needed to defeat the Republican-led filibuster it faced.

The legislation would have mandated new transparency measures, including a requirement for nonprofit groups that spend money on political ads to show the names of the top donors in their advertisements. It would have also instituted a rule requiring the leader of an organization, or a group’s largest contributor, to “stand by the ad” and give the familiar disclaimer that candidates must include in their advertisements: “My name is so-and-so, and I approve this message.”

Unlike nonprofit groups active in politics, super PACs are required to disclose their donors. However, as OpenSecrets Blog recently reported, a handful of super PACs are exploiting a loophole in this process and disclosing only the names of nonprofit organizations registered with the Internal Revenue Service under sections 501(c)(4) or 501(c)(6) of the U.S. tax code as their funders.

Except for the Revolving Door section, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License by OpenSecrets.org. To request permission for commercial use, please contact us.